loyer was served with the notice dated 27.01.1998 by the Department as to why ESI contribution should not be recovered on ₹ 1,45,09,700/- representing feeding charges relating to the period from October 1986 to March 1992 paid by the Principal employer @ 7.25% which comes to ₹ 10,51,953/-. The Principal employer contended the case. The Deputy Director of ESI Corporation passed an order under Section 45-A of the ESTI Act stating that the contribution payable by the principal employer .....

82 issued by the respondent was not applicable to the principal employer and the principal employer though has been maintaining separate records for the amount paid under different headings to the contracts not produced the same before the Department and the appeal was dismissed. Against this order the petitioners approached the High Court. The petitioners contended that the contribution payable by the principal employer is only upon 25% of the total amount paid by wages to the contractors as pe .....

r may assume 25% of such bills towards labor charges and recover contribution thereon. This is applicable only in cases of relating to the payment relating to repair/maintenance etc., of the factory/establishment building. The memorandum dated 26.06.1982 would clarify that the bill includes apart from labor charges, cost of material, profit etc of the contractor or the person doing the job and this adoption of 25% is applicable only when the principal employer is not in a position to produce any .....